How can Housing Affordability in Warringah be improved?

Does the absence of comments here amount to a massive 'No idea'? It seems we may be shutting the gate after the horse has bolted! Successive federal and state governments have done absolutely nothing to redress the affordable housing crisis in Australia. The current federal government is the first to even air the issue publicly since the Keating days. The 'leave it to the market' mantra has proven a disaster in this country, aided and abetted by a taxation system that actively rewards those who already own property and assets and punishes those who don't. In world terms housing affordability in Australia is close to the worst in the developed world. This is something that we as a nation should not be proud of. I'm not the first to call Australia's housing policy - or lack thereof - a dismal failure. But what do we do about it? I'd really like to hear some ideas on this one!

Why not make it mandatory that all unit and other dense living developments sell a percentage (5-10%?) of the final properties at a below market price to lower income earners in key job roles? Obviously a means test would have to be carried out on the potential buyers to ensure they were in need of the assistance.

Perhaps encourage investment property owners to offer their properties at a reduced rent by reducing rates when it can be proven they are leasing out at a rate below their market potential. Eg a landlord leasing out their 3 bedroom apartment for $450 instead of the $550 market value.

The rich powerful and the aged boomers are letting everyone else down. Anyone under 40 is experiencing worse living conditions than their parents.

Theyre squeezing us like rats in cage, ugly cheap quality units. Theres couples with 2 kids moving into totally inappropriate housing due to cost.

All you bastards in your nice safe houses in the richer suburbs...go ahead and make 'informed decisions' about our lives. YOU don't have to live in it yourselves, after all!

In a free market, the price of a particular place of residence reflects the desirability of living there compared with other places. Other things being equal, to be affordable, housing would have to made less desirable. Make Warringah a miserable place to live in, and housing here will become more affordable.

Market interventions such as sale price/rent capping, or tying subsidised property ownership/rents to specific jobs, might seem tempting, but they invariably have unintended side effects. For example, the first home-owners grant fed (rather predictably!) directly into the selling prices of houses, and benefited only those who already owned property.

Since I assume Warringah isn't going to deliberately make itself less desirable to live in (though increasing housing densities will do that), the implication is that increased affordability will only be achieved by improving other places. Warringah should be doing research to find out exactly what motivates people to move here, with a view to helping other LGAs make themselves better candidates.

Would some sensible economic modifications to the present Building code help? Any bright architects out there listening to we "table-bangers"?

In some countries such as the US the 'free market' ideology is the prime driver of the economy and, in turn, of housing policy. In much of Europe. on the other hand, government intervention and regulation has a much more 'hands-on' level of control of housing. Each has its strenghs and weaknesses.

In Australia, unfortunatly the model we've opted for combines the worst of both worlds, which is why our housing cost is so out of whack with most of the rest of the world - ie we are close to the least affordable. On the one hand we allow the more…

Rezoning Non Urban land into Urban land will provide relatively inexpensive land on which to build new dwellings.

Step one is to use controlled immigration to achieve a state where the aging population effect of the baby boom is cancelled out, and at the same time the problem will not repeat in the future because the natural birth rate plus controlled immigration means that Australia is replacing people as they die, not just now, but into the future. This may not be achievable at the current population, but it should be achievable at some future higher population, which will then be stable.

Once you have a credible plan in place that leads to a future stable population, you can more…

I suggest we return to the planning law of the 1980s that allowed the title of a large allotment of land to be divided for building a second dwelling, thereby increasing the population on existing land. This would also be economically sustainable to those who may wish to remain in their existing home on such blocks of land.

A good example of this can be seen at 115 Cook Street Forestville, where, around 1990, a well designed and aesthetically pleasing cottage was built at the rear of the existing 1950s cottage. This is also a good example of retaining the character more…

Oops… the good example of a cottage built on a split title of land should read 111 Cook Street, not 115 Cook Street, Forestville, although the land title of 115 Cook Street was also split in the 1990s and had two town houses added.

Considering the powers in the council's possession, there is one device that would have considerable impact. This would be to decrease the minimum required area per residence especially in low density zones. The idea is, by allowing more residences per land area housing would be made more affordable in two ways. First, by decreasing the portion size the price will also decrease. For denser areas this would mean increasing the number of units. This leads to the second point of increasing housing stock available on the market to reduce selling prices. Simply put it would increase the supply to meet the demand. Guided properly, this would be strategically managed to facilitate profitability for the developer as well as increasing affordability.

An additional tact would be to encourage the development of cooperative housing projects. These take the developer and their profit margin out of the equation. Now there is no profit to be concerned about, cutting corners in construction is not a device to make money. Thus cooperative housing projects can be of better quality as well being more affordable.

Some councils allow a small increase in density for a residential flat building if a proportion is sold as affordable housing (subject to appropriate checks). This also provides better outcomes as you don't get concentrated pockets of lower socio economic groups which can cause social issues.

"How can Housing Affordability in Warringah be Improved"?

What A DUMB QUESTION!!!Just keep doing what you are doing and make the place obnoxious to live in.Fine everyone,charge everyone,tax everyone.Deplete services like police,schools and hospitals.Let youth behave unchecked,open more brothels and adult shops just open the gates and let them in.

Warringah is sacred, too valuable, to be underpriced or undersold to appease a loud and lazy minority.Maintain the standard or increase it but never sell our inheritance off so cheaply.Nature won't repeat it,so value it properly for our future families.Go west if you can't afford it,like thousands of other Aussies have done in the past.Work hard save your money and buy in Warringah when you can afford it.